VAWA, Republican and Ducks

You know the saying “if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck”? I have written about the Republican Party recent efforts to proactively undermine or outright attack existing women’s rights.  There is a long list of recent Republican efforts; trying to redefine rape, defunding planned parenthood and transvaginal ultrasounds to name a few.

With the list of detailed proposed legislation and public stances it is clear that the Republican Party has adapted a platform that is anti-women.  It will be argued by those on the right who support those positions that there are various reasons or we misunderstand but you can now add another item to that list.

The “Violence Against Women Act “(VAWA) was passed with bipartisan support in 1994.  It is a federal law that provides funding toward investigation and prosecution of violent crimes against women, imposed automatic and mandatory restitution on those convicted, and allowed civil redress in cases prosecutors chose to leave unprosecuted. The Act also established the Office on Violence Against Women within the Department of Justice.

The VAWA was reauthorized by Congress in 2000, and again in December 2005.  According to the ACLU in their July 27, 2005 'Letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee Regarding the Violence Against Women Act of 2005, S. 1197' stated that "VAWA is one of the most effective pieces of legislation enacted to end domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking. It has dramatically improved the law enforcement response to violence against women and has provided critical services necessary to support women in their struggle to overcome abusive situations. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_Against_Women_Act

 

This year’s version which was written by the Democrats includes 3 new provisions that Republicans don't like. One, it gives Indian tribal governments new powers to prosecute crimes against women. Two, it increases the ability of undocumented immigrants to report violence against themselves without fear of deportation. And three, for shelters and programs that receive this money, it bans discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

Studies show that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender victims experience domestic violence at roughly the same rate as the general population,” but they are less likely to receive help, said Representative Jared Polis, Democrat of Colorado.

The Republican House has proposed their own version of the bill that women and religious advocacy groups oppose.  31 religious groups, including the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, the National Association of Evangelicals and the Episcopal Church, opposed immigration provisions of the House bill.

These provisions “would actually roll back protections in current law for battered noncitizens, making them more vulnerable and, in some cases, endangering their lives,” the groups said in a letter to House leaders.

How can one find fault with strengthening a bill that protects  groups that are more vulnerable?  The bill was passed with Republican support in the Senate; it is supported by hundreds of advocacy groups and law enforcement agencies. 

Advocacy groups active on domestic violence warned that the House bill would mark a "low point" in the drive to eliminate violence against women.

"With rollbacks of immigration provisions, the absence of strong protections for Native women, much less any protections or services for the [lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender] community, this bill is a travesty," said Lisalyn Jacobs, vice president for government relations at Legal Momentum, a women's legal advocacy group.

Total 2012 VAWA Budget Request – $455 Million

In fiscal year 2010, the U.S. government allocated the $52.7 billion for foreign aid:

Democrats in Congress and others have been accusing Republicans for months for waging a war on women," said Rep. Sandy Adams (R-Fla.), the sponsor of the bill. "We've been called anti-victim, elitist, homophobic and racist. These ridiculous attacks stop now. Right here, right now."

Okay – then vote for a bill that is improved and its coverage expanded to those who need it the most. The argument against it is that the previous bill covered everyone equally. 

But we all know not everyone is treated equally.
And we can't improve legislation because it is a political ploy........

BTW in 2010 The US Fish & Wildlife service wanted to designate 12 million acres in North Dakota, South Dakota and Montana as the Dakota Grasslands Conservation Area and then spend well over 500 million dollars preserving ducks there by paying land owners to use their land only for grazing.  Just saying.